Measuring enhanced recovery in obstetrics: a narrative review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery is a protocolized approach to perioperative care, with the aim to optimize maternal recovery after surgery. It is associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes, including decreased length of hospital stay, opioid consumption, pain scores, complications, increased maternal satisfaction, and increased breastfeeding success. However, the pace and enthusiasm of adoption of enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery internationally has not yet been matched with high-quality evidence demonstrating its benefit, and current studies provide low- to very low-quality evidence in support of enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery. This article provides a summary of current measures of enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery success, and optimal measures of inpatient and outpatient postpartum recovery. We summarize outcomes from 22 published enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery implementation studies and 2 meta-analyses. A variety of disparate metrics have been used to measure enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery success, including process measures (length of hospital stay, bundle compliance, preoperative fasting time, time to first mobilization, time to urinary catheter removal), maternal outcomes (patient-reported outcome measures, complications, opioid consumption, satisfaction), neonatal outcomes (breastfeeding success, Apgar scores, maternal-neonatal bonding), cost savings, and complication rates (maternal readmission rate, urinary recatheterization rate, neonatal readmission rate). A core outcome set for use in enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery studies has been developed through Delphi consensus, involving stakeholders including obstetricians, anesthesiologists, patients, and a midwife. Fifteen measures covering key aspects of enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery adoption are recommended for use in future enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery implementation studies. The use of these outcome measures could improve the quality of evidence surrounding enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery. Using evidence-based evaluation guidelines developed by the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) group, the Obstetric Quality of Recovery score (ObsQoR) was identified as the best patient-reported outcome measure for inpatient postpartum recovery. Advances in our understanding of postpartum recovery as a multidimensional and dynamic construct have opened new avenues for the identification of optimum patient-reported outcome measures in this context. The use of standardized measures such as these will facilitate pooling of data in future studies and improve overall levels of evidence surrounding enhanced recovery after cesarean delivery. Larger studies with optimal study designs, using recommended outcomes including patient-reported outcome measures, will reduce variation and improve data quality to help guide future recommendations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».